It is possible to suppose, in the first place, that the Artificer,though entirely well-meaning, was not a free agent. We can construct amyth in which an Elder Power should announce to a Younger Power hisintention of setting a number of sentient puppets dancing for hisamusement, and regaling himself with the spectacle of their antics, inutter heedlessness of the agonies they must endure, which would,indeed, lend an additional savor to the diversion. This Elder Power,with the "sportsman's" preference for pigeons as against clay balls,would be something like the God of Mr. Thomas Hardy.

So, some knowledge of the old Gnostics and Hume's cynical alternatives to Deism's view of an all-wise creator seem at play here. But Archer's sarcasm really stands out.

Did H.P.L. know the vocal atheists of the 19th c. like Shaw, Huxley, and Archer? Does he ever talk of Wells or Wells' later dabbling with politics and religion?

It's been awhile since I checked the boards here, and I'm not sure that you will find my answer still relevant, but here goes:

I did a quick index check of two books.

According to Lovecraft's Library: A Catalogue, HPL did have the works of Shaw (Back to Methuselah) and Wells (The Outline of History and A Short History of the World) in his library at some point. He did own an anthology that had one of Archer's stories (Masterpieces of Mystery). There is nothing listed for Huxley.

Joshi's biography of Lovecraft (HP Lovecraft: A Life) makes it clear that Lovecraft was well aware of Huxley's writings on ethnicity and biology. Shaw and Archer are not mentioned in the biography. Wells is briefly mentioned on 3 occasions, and merely as an influence. Lovecraft considered Wells to be one of the better science fiction writers of the day.